Attenzione: i dati modificati non sono ancora stati salvati. Per confermare inserimenti o cancellazioni di voci è necessario confermare con il tasto SALVA/INSERISCI in fondo alla pagina
IRIS
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
In allergic rhinitis, a relevant outcome providing information on the effectiveness of interventions is needed. In MASK-air (Mobile Airways Sentinel Network), a visual analogue scale (VAS) for work is used as a relevant outcome. This study aimed to assess the performance of the work VAS work by comparing VAS work with other VAS measurements and symptom-medication scores obtained concurrently.
METHODS:
All consecutive MASK-air users in 23 countries from 1 June 2016 to 31 October 2018 were included (14 189 users; 205 904 days). Geolocalized users self-assessed daily symptom control using the touchscreen functionality on their smart phone to click on VAS scores (ranging from 0 to 100) for overall symptoms (global), nose, eyes, asthma and work. Two symptom-medication scores were used: the modified EAACI CSMS score and the MASK control score for rhinitis. To assess data quality, the intra-individual response variability (IRV) index was calculated.
RESULTS:
A strong correlation was observed between VAS work and other VAS. The highest levels for correlation with VAS work and variance explained in VAS work were found with VAS global, followed by VAS nose, eye and asthma. In comparison with VAS global, the mCSMS and MASK control score showed a lower correlation with VAS work. Results are unlikely to be explained by a low quality of data arising from repeated VAS measures.
CONCLUSIONS:
VAS work correlates with other outcomes (VAS global, nose, eye and asthma) but less well with a symptom-medication score. VAS work should be considered as a potentially useful AR outcome in intervention studies.
Background: In allergic rhinitis, a relevant outcome providing information on the effectiveness of interventions is needed. In MASK-air (Mobile Airways Sentinel Network), a visual analogue scale (VAS) for work is used as a relevant outcome. This study aimed to assess the performance of the work VAS work by comparing VAS work with other VAS measurements and symptom-medication scores obtained concurrently. Methods: All consecutive MASK-air users in 23 countries from 1 June 2016 to 31 October 2018 were included (14 189 users; 205 904 days). Geolocalized users self-assessed daily symptom control using the touchscreen functionality on their smart phone to click on VAS scores (ranging from 0 to 100) for overall symptoms (global), nose, eyes, asthma and work. Two symptom-medication scores were used: the modified EAACI CSMS score and the MASK control score for rhinitis. To assess data quality, the intra-individual response variability (IRV) index was calculated. Results: A strong correlation was observed between VAS work and other VAS. The highest levels for correlation with VAS work and variance explained in VAS work were found with VAS global, followed by VAS nose, eye and asthma. In comparison with VAS global, the mCSMS and MASK control score showed a lower correlation with VAS work. Results are unlikely to be explained by a low quality of data arising from repeated VAS measures. Conclusions: VAS work correlates with other outcomes (VAS global, nose, eye and asthma) but less well with a symptom-medication score. VAS work should be considered as a potentially useful AR outcome in intervention studies.
Correlation between work impairment, scores of rhinitis severity and asthma using the MASK-air® App
Bedard A.;Anto J. M.;Fonseca J. A.;Arnavielhe S.;Bachert C.;Bedbrook A.;Bindslev-Jensen C.;Bosnic-Anticevich S.;Cardona V.;Cruz A. A.;Fokkens W. J.;Garcia-Aymerich J.;Hellings P. W.;Ivancevich J. C.;Klimek L.;Kuna P.;Kvedariene V.;Larenas-Linnemann D.;Melen E.;Monti R.;Mosges R.;Mullol J.;Papadopoulos N. G.;Pham-Thi N.;Samolinski B.;Tomazic P. V.;Toppila-Salmi S.;Ventura M. T.;Yorgancioglu A.;Bousquet J.;Pfaar O.;Basagana X.;Aberer W.;Agache I.;Akdis C. A.;Akdis M.;Aliberti M. R.;Almeida R.;Amat F.;Angles R.;Annesi-Maesano I.;Ansotegui I. J.;Anto J. M.;Arnavielle S.;Asayag E.;Asarnoj A.;Arshad H.;Avolio F.;Bacci E.;Baiardini I.;Barbara C.;Barbagallo M.;Baroni I.;Barreto B. A.;Bateman E. D.;Bedolla-Barajas M.;Bewick M.;Beghe B.;Bel E. H.;Bergmann K. C.;Bennoor K. S.;Benson M.;Bertorello L.;Bialoszewski A. Z.;Bieber T.;Bialek S.;Bjermer L.;Blain H.;Blasi F.;Blua A.;Bochenska Marciniak M.;Bogus-Buczynska I.;Boner A. L.;Bonini M.;Bonini S.;Bosse I.;Bouchard J.;Boulet L. P.;Bourret R.;Bousquet P. J.;Braido F.;Briedis V.;Brightling C. E.;Brozek J.;Bucca C.;Buhl R.;Buonaiuto R.;Panaitescu C.;Burguete Cabanas M. T.;Burte E.;Bush A.;Caballero-Fonseca F.;Caillaud D.;Caimmi D.;Calderon M. A.;Camargos P. A. M.;Camuzat T.;Canfora G.;Canonica G. W.;Carlsen K. H.;Carreiro-Martins P.;Carriazo A. M.;Carr W.;Cartier C.;Casale T.;Castellano G.;Cecchi L.;Cepeda A. M.;Chavannes N. H.;Chen Y.;Chiron R.;Chivato T.;Chkhartishvili E.;Chuchalin A. G.;Chung K. F.;Ciaravolo M. M.;Ciceran A.;Cingi C.;Ciprandi G.;Carvalho Coehlo A. C.;Colas L.;Colgan E.;Coll J.;Conforti D.;Constantinidis J.;Correia de Sousa J.;Cortes-Grimaldo R. M.;Corti F.;Costa E.;Costa-Dominguez M. C.;Courbis A. L.;Cox L.;Crescenzo M.;Custovic A.;Czarlewski W.;Dahlen S. E.;D'Amato G.;Dario C.;da Silva J.;Dauvilliers Y.;Darsow U.;De Blay F.;De Carlo G.;Dedeu T.;de Fatima Emerson M.;De Feo G.;De Vries G.;De Martino B.;Motta Rubini N. P.;Deleanu D.;Denburg J. A.;Devillier P.;Di Capua Ercolano S.;Di Carluccio N.;Didier A.;Dokic D.;Dominguez-Silva M. G.;Douagui H.;Dray G.;Dubakiene R.;Durham S. R.;Du Toit G.;Dykewicz M. S.;El-Gamal Y.;Eklund P.;Eller E.;Emuzyte R.;Farrell J.;Farsi A.;Ferreira de Mello J.;Ferrero J.;Fink-Wagner A.;Fiocchi A.;Fontaine J. F.;Forti S.;Fuentes-Perez J. M.;Galvez-Romero J. L.;Gamkrelidze A.;Garcia-Cobas C. Y.;Garcia-Cruz M. H.;Gemicioglu B.;Genova S.;Christoff G.;Gereda J. E.;Gerth van Wijk R.;Gomez R. M.;Gomez-Vera J.;Gonzalez Diaz S.;Gotua M.;Grisle I.;Guidacci M.;Guldemond N. A.;Gutter Z.;Guzman M. A.;Haahtela T.;Hajjam J.;Hernandez L.;Hourihane J. O. '. B.;Huerta-Villalobos Y. R.;Humbert M.;Iaccarino G.;Illario M.;Ispayeva Z.;Jares E. J.;Jassem E.;Johnston S. L.;Joos G.;Jung K. S.;Just J.;Jutel M.;Kaidashev I.;Kalayci O.;Kalyoncu A. F.;Karjalainen J.;Kardas P.;Keil T.;Keith P. K.;Khaitov M.;Khaltaev N.;Kleine-Tebbe J.;Kowalski M. L.;Kuitunen M.;Kull I.;Kupczyk M.;Krzych-Falta E.;Lacwik P.;Laune D.;Lauri D.;Lavrut J.;Le L. T. T.;Lessa M.;Levato G.;Li J.;Lieberman P.;Lipiec A.;Lipworth B.;Lodrup Carlsen K. C.;Louis R.;Lourenco O.;Luna-Pech J. A.;Magnan A.;Mahboub B.;Maier D.;Mair A.;Majer I.;Malva J.;Mandajieva E.;Manning P.;De Manuel Keenoy E.;Marshall G. D.;Masjedi M. R.;Maspero J. F.;Mathieu-Dupas E.;Matta Campos J. J.;Matos A. L.;Maurer M.;Mavale-Manuel S.;Mayora O.;Meco C.;Medina-Avalos M. A.;Melo-Gomes E.;Meltzer E. O.;Menditto E.;Mercier J.;Miculinic N.;Mihaltan F.;Milenkovic B.;Moda G.;Mogica-Martinez M. D.;Mohammad Y.;Momas I.;Montefort S.;Mora Bogado D.;Morais-Almeida M.;Morato-Castro F. F.;Mota-Pinto A.;Moura Santo P.;Munter L.;Muraro A.;Murray R.;Naclerio R.;Nadif R.;Nalin M.;Napoli L.;Namazova-Baranova L.;Neffen H.;Niedeberger V.;Nekam K.;Neou A.;Nieto A.;Nogueira-Silva L.;Nogues M.;Novellino E.;Nyembue T. D.;O'Hehir R. E.;Odzhakova C.;Ohta K.;Okamoto Y.;Okubo K.;Onorato G. L.;Ortega Cisneros M.;Ouedraogo S.;Pali-Scholl I.;Palkonen S.;Panzner P.;Park H. S.;Papi A.;Passalacqua G.;Paulino E.;Pawankar R.;Pedersen S.;Pepin J. L.;Pereira A. M.;Persico M.;Phillips J.;Picard R.;Pigearias B.;Pin I.;Pitsios C.;Plavec D.;Pohl W.;Popov T. A.;Portejoie F.;Potter P.;Pozzi A. C.;Price D.;Prokopakis E. P.;Puy R.;Pugin B.;Pulido Ross R. E.;Przemecka M.;Rabe K. F.;Raciborski F.;Rajabian-Soderlund R.;Reitsma S.;Ribeirinho I.;Rimmer J.;Rivero-Yeverino D.;Rizzo J. A.;Rizzo M. C.;Robalo-Cordeiro C.;Rodenas F.;Rodo X.;Rodriguez Gonzalez M.;Rodriguez-Manas L.;Rolland C.;Rodrigues Valle S.;Roman Rodriguez M.;Romano A.;Rodriguez-Zagal E.;Rolla G.;Roller-Wirnsberger R. E.;Romano M.;Rosado-Pinto J.;Rosario N.;Rottem M.;Ryan D.;Sagara H.;Salimaki J.;Sanchez-Borges M.;Sastre-Dominguez J.;Scadding G. K.;Schunemann H. J.;Scichilone N.;Schmid-Grendelmeier P.;Sarquis Serpa F.;Shamai S.;Sheikh A.;Sierra M.;Simons F. E. R.;Siroux V.;Sisul J. C.;Skrindo I.;Sole D.;Somekh D.;Sondermann M.;Sooronbaev T.;Sova M.;Sorensen M.;Sorlini M.;Spranger O.;Stellato C.;Stelmach R.;Stukas R.;Sunyer J.;Strozek J.;Szylling A.;Tebyrica J. N.;Thibaudon M.;To T.;Todo-Bom A.;Trama U.;Triggiani M.;Suppli Ulrik C.;Urrutia-Pereira M.;Valenta R.;Valero A.;Valiulis A.;Valovirta E.;van Eerd M.;van Ganse E.;van Hage M.;Vandenplas O.;Vezzani G.;Vasankari T.;Vatrella A.;Verissimo M. T.;Viart F.;Viegi G.;Vicheva D.;Vontetsianos T.;Wagenmann M.;Walker S.;Wallace D.;Wang D. Y.;Waserman S.;Werfel T.;Westman M.;Wickman M.;Williams D. M.;Williams S.;Wilson N.;Wright J.;Wroczynski P.;Yakovliev P.;Yawn B. P.;Yiallouros P. K.;Yusuf O. M.;Zar H. J.;Zhang L.;Zhong N.;Zernotti M. E.;Zhanat I.;Zidarn M.;Zuberbier T.;Zubrinich C.;Zurkuhlen A.
2020-01-01
Abstract
Background: In allergic rhinitis, a relevant outcome providing information on the effectiveness of interventions is needed. In MASK-air (Mobile Airways Sentinel Network), a visual analogue scale (VAS) for work is used as a relevant outcome. This study aimed to assess the performance of the work VAS work by comparing VAS work with other VAS measurements and symptom-medication scores obtained concurrently. Methods: All consecutive MASK-air users in 23 countries from 1 June 2016 to 31 October 2018 were included (14 189 users; 205 904 days). Geolocalized users self-assessed daily symptom control using the touchscreen functionality on their smart phone to click on VAS scores (ranging from 0 to 100) for overall symptoms (global), nose, eyes, asthma and work. Two symptom-medication scores were used: the modified EAACI CSMS score and the MASK control score for rhinitis. To assess data quality, the intra-individual response variability (IRV) index was calculated. Results: A strong correlation was observed between VAS work and other VAS. The highest levels for correlation with VAS work and variance explained in VAS work were found with VAS global, followed by VAS nose, eye and asthma. In comparison with VAS global, the mCSMS and MASK control score showed a lower correlation with VAS work. Results are unlikely to be explained by a low quality of data arising from repeated VAS measures. Conclusions: VAS work correlates with other outcomes (VAS global, nose, eye and asthma) but less well with a symptom-medication score. VAS work should be considered as a potentially useful AR outcome in intervention studies.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
In allergic rhinitis, a relevant outcome providing information on the effectiveness of interventions is needed. In MASK-air (Mobile Airways Sentinel Network), a visual analogue scale (VAS) for work is used as a relevant outcome. This study aimed to assess the performance of the work VAS work by comparing VAS work with other VAS measurements and symptom-medication scores obtained concurrently.
METHODS:
All consecutive MASK-air users in 23 countries from 1 June 2016 to 31 October 2018 were included (14 189 users; 205 904 days). Geolocalized users self-assessed daily symptom control using the touchscreen functionality on their smart phone to click on VAS scores (ranging from 0 to 100) for overall symptoms (global), nose, eyes, asthma and work. Two symptom-medication scores were used: the modified EAACI CSMS score and the MASK control score for rhinitis. To assess data quality, the intra-individual response variability (IRV) index was calculated.
RESULTS:
A strong correlation was observed between VAS work and other VAS. The highest levels for correlation with VAS work and variance explained in VAS work were found with VAS global, followed by VAS nose, eye and asthma. In comparison with VAS global, the mCSMS and MASK control score showed a lower correlation with VAS work. Results are unlikely to be explained by a low quality of data arising from repeated VAS measures.
CONCLUSIONS:
VAS work correlates with other outcomes (VAS global, nose, eye and asthma) but less well with a symptom-medication score. VAS work should be considered as a potentially useful AR outcome in intervention studies.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11586/392356
Attenzione
Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo
Citazioni
15
37
34
social impact
Conferma cancellazione
Sei sicuro che questo prodotto debba essere cancellato?
simulazione ASN
Il report seguente simula gli indicatori relativi alla propria produzione scientifica in relazione alle soglie ASN 2023-2025 del proprio SC/SSD. Si ricorda che il superamento dei valori soglia (almeno 2 su 3) è requisito necessario ma non sufficiente al conseguimento dell'abilitazione. La simulazione si basa sui dati IRIS e sugli indicatori bibliometrici alla data indicata e non tiene conto di eventuali periodi di congedo obbligatorio, che in sede di domanda ASN danno diritto a incrementi percentuali dei valori. La simulazione può differire dall'esito di un’eventuale domanda ASN sia per errori di catalogazione e/o dati mancanti in IRIS, sia per la variabilità dei dati bibliometrici nel tempo. Si consideri che Anvur calcola i valori degli indicatori all'ultima data utile per la presentazione delle domande.
La presente simulazione è stata realizzata sulla base delle specifiche raccolte sul tavolo ER del Focus Group IRIS coordinato dall’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e delle regole riportate nel DM 589/2018 e allegata Tabella A. Cineca, l’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e il Focus Group IRIS non si assumono alcuna responsabilità in merito all’uso che il diretto interessato o terzi faranno della simulazione. Si specifica inoltre che la simulazione contiene calcoli effettuati con dati e algoritmi di pubblico dominio e deve quindi essere considerata come un mero ausilio al calcolo svolgibile manualmente o con strumenti equivalenti.
